Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

westbee t1_j1g6uzi wrote

How many holocaust survivors are even left?

It happened 78 years ago.

A 10 year old would be 88 years old now.

I can't imagine there's more than a 100 left let alone "thousands in NY".

160

SlipperyGaloshes t1_j1gcv88 wrote

Hanukkah is eight days, so could be eight meals per person which adds up.

However, the article also goes on to state there are approx 15-20k survivors in the city. I grew up in NY and learned about the Holocaust directly from multiple survivors throughout my schooling so I can believe it.

149

westbee t1_j1gtrmm wrote

I can't wrap my head around that number.

There are 15 thousand people between the ages of 85-105 that are holocaust survivors??

Seems far fetched.

EDIT: https://www.health.ny.gov/statistics/vital_statistics/2010/table01.htm

There are 141K people in New York city that are 85 plus years old. So more than 10 percent of those people are holocaust survivors.

It's sounding more and more farfetched to me.

39

Arnlaugur1 t1_j1gy6uy wrote

NYC has the largest Jewish population outside of Israel, that plus that the Jewish community has well established roots in NYC (so old people are less likely to move out of the city). Jews make up 13% of NYC. With that in mind I could totally see that as possible, maybe not likely but definitely possible

113

TarryBuckwell t1_j1i05u7 wrote

I thought Brooklyn alone had a larger Jewish population than Israel

15

Arnlaugur1 t1_j1jfo6g wrote

I've heard something like that as well and might have once been true seeing as Israel is a young country of still mostly first or second generation immigrants or might be true if you only count Jewish people born in Israel with Israeli parents

2

DredZedPrime t1_j1gycaq wrote

Really doesn't seem that far fetched to me. You've probably never been in NYC. The Jewish population is pretty damn big, and it is one of the places where a hell of a lot of survivors settled, since it's where a lot of them would have entered the US.

55

westbee t1_j1hdlcu wrote

Did you look at the numbers?

141,000 people in the city of New York are 85 plus years old.

10%+ of those people are holocaust survivors? No fucking way.

−33

jayb556677 t1_j1hml8w wrote

Jewish people make up 13% of NYC so the idea that they make up 13% of the 141,000 seems reasonable

44

westbee t1_j1i3z12 wrote

Are you saying that every single Jewish person is a holocaust survivor?

The only way that would make sense is if 100% of Jewish people are holocaust survivors.

−10

coat_hanger_dias t1_j1i4dn0 wrote

Sure, but for this to hold true, 100% of the 85+ year old Jewish population would need to be holocaust survivors, which just isn't possible. Being a Jewish person that was alive somewhere on earth during the years the holocaust happened does not make you a "holocaust survivor".

I'm not a survivor of the war in Ukraine, for example, just because I'm alive and living life completely unaffected on the other side of the planet.

−10

canadianjumpingbean t1_j1hv9ol wrote

What's your political motivation for undermining holocaust survivors?

You have gone beyond curiosity at this point, and have ventured into denial.

15

Indocede t1_j1hz24f wrote

Statistical disbelief does not equate undermining holocaust survivors.

What is your political motivation for rushing to an unsubstantiated conclusion about their intention?

Edit: And furthermore, if you want to convince people genuinely, you don't rush to conclusions and assume the very worst. Such nonsense to assume someone has some deep-seated prejudice or bigoted motivation because they can't believe the numbers.

−7

somo47 t1_j1hzvt3 wrote

How is their conclusion unsubstantiated? If they were just curious at how the article reached that number there’s multiple sources cited in this thread outlining the plausibility. The continued disbelief despite evidence presented makes their motivation suspect.

18

Indocede t1_j1i0bf4 wrote

You are assuming they have read each of those sources in this thread. It is extremely possible they have not. Not everyone reads every comment and subchain. You are acting upon confirmation bias, where you see a source and assume everyone must have seen it. This is not true.

If you are going to insinuate someone of Holocaust denialism or bigotry of some form, you need a lot more then "well they didn't acknowledge these particular comments I saw."

−17

somo47 t1_j1i12p1 wrote

That’s not how confirmation bias works, the sources are direct replies to the person’s question and they directly replied to those threads continuing to disagree. Confirmation bias isn’t “seeing a source and assuming everyone must have seen it”.

Confirmation bias is cherry picking information that agrees with you and neglecting to address the data that doesn’t.

10

Indocede t1_j1iymua wrote

>Confirmation bias is cherry picking information that agrees with you and neglecting to address the data that doesn’t.

You cherry pick comments about population demographics, but you do not address reasonable critiques. It is entirely fair to believe a Jewish population existed in NYC before the Holocaust. If this is true, it is unlikely that the entire population of elderly Jews in NYC are Holocaust survivors.

It is confirmation bias because from a few particular comments about demographics, you have decided that someone must have some subversive agenda. It could not possibly be someone who simply can't believe there can be 10,000 people in a single city who survived horrible, inhumane suffering over 70 years ago, pushing them into an age bracket where people start dying of old age consistently.

I find this insinuation to be utterly obnoxious and disrespectful. Insinuating bigotry should be done with actual substance. It diminishes the discussion and resolution to such a horrible thing when people want to talk about the anguish of dealing someone in disbelief about demographics.

Undermining Holocaust survivors... no one has actually explained what that means. It's especially ridiculous when there is a simultaneous movement to record the stories of these survivors with priority given their age, knowing in a few short years, the community could disappear entirely.

Cherry picking a few comments on Reddit to insinuate bigotry while ignoring a pile of reason someone might believe old age has now limited the number of people impacted by an event a literal lifetime ago.

−1

Indocede t1_j1i1nfm wrote

Yes, you cherry picked a few comments that you saw and are biasing your argument around them. You are neglecting the plausibility that the person did not see those comments. It is absolutely a form of confirmation bias.

Edit: And for clarity the argument here isn't whether or not it is plausible there exists that many survivors in NYC. The argument is whether or not it is plausible for someone to disbelieve that figure.

−14

somo47 t1_j1ir27c wrote

Oh I see, you’re either very confused or trolling.

Either way stay in school bud, some day hopefully you’ll be able to correctly use the phrases you’re parroting.

6

Indocede t1_j1iwf9g wrote

It is 100% confirmation bias.

Your petty insults don't change that fact.

1

iamblessedbuttired t1_j1gwfw3 wrote

The youngest children would be around 78 or 79 so some might be in their early 80s. Given that - from the figures I found, there are approximately 1.6 million Jews in New York, and in the general population about 2.7 people are 80 or older - this amounts to around 30K people. So, I could easily see that they could feed thousands of survivors in New York.

63

westbee t1_j1hdfwf wrote

With that math and logic, I can deduct that the population of Michigan has about 1% of people who came from California.

1% would be 100,000 people so I could easily see there being "thousands" of shark bite survivors.

−11

Rattfink45 t1_j1hkgvg wrote

If there were a period in history where 100% of Californians who got into the ocean were bitten by sharks, of course.

28

coat_hanger_dias t1_j1i4ysn wrote

The holocaust did not affect 100% of the global Jewish population.

−1

westbee t1_j1i42e1 wrote

Well that's what is being said.

If you are 85 years or older, Jewish, and live in NY... you are a holocaust survivor.

−2

DavidLloydGorgeous t1_j1h1nad wrote

I’m by no means claiming to know for certain, but I like history and numbers so I’ll bite.

This report put the total number in the US in 2010 as approx. 127,000 and claims only half would remain by 2020 https://www.claimscon.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Jewish-Survivors-USA_v2-_3_25_14.pdf

This report put the number of survivors in New York state in 2020 as approx. 38,000 https://www.aging.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Kover_Selfhelp%20Holocaust%20Survivor%20Population%20Report%202nd%20edition%202013.pdf

This news article from March of this year puts the total US number below 50,000 https://www.atlantajewishtimes.com/u-s-holocaust-survivor-count-dips-to-50000/ and I wouldn’t be surprised if Covid and other related illness made up some of the dramatic decrease between 2020 and 2022

This is all down from an estimated 500,000 survivors in the world in 2014 and about 100,000 in 2016 https://time.com/4392413/elie-wiesel-holocaust-survivors-remaining/?amp=true

Here’s a transcript of a U.S. Senate Special Committee from 2014 repeating those numbers https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-113shrg26050/html/CHRG-113shrg26050.htm which unfortunately mentions the “dairy” of Anne Frank (towards the end of Sen. Boxer’s opening comments)

The organization from the article in question says they help about 2,000 in New York per week https://www.metcouncil.org/holocaust-survivor-program

The Holocaust left many millions of victims, a large number of whom settled in the US after the war. These reports also seem to be counting people born at the end of the Holocaust, making the youngest 78 years old. The numbers don’t seem entirely too far-fetched to me, though it’s sadly obvious they’re dwindling quickly.

30

TarryBuckwell t1_j1i0vgm wrote

I remember hearing about and also randomly reading several obits of Holocaust survivors succumbing to Covid :/

6

westbee t1_j1hd2rz wrote

My step dad told us that he fought in the Vietnam War.

He was stationed on a aircraft carrier that was docked a hundred miles from shore.

Does that count as really "fighting" in the Vietnam war?

How many of these "survivors" are actually people who left the country between 1939 and 1941 before anything horrible started happening?

What counts as a survivor?

I imagine if we counted everyone including babies then these numbers seem more appropriate. I just fill ill to lump in everyone. Someone who left the country in 1939 to flee to the US and anyone born 1943-1944 shouldn't really be lumped in with someone who was a prisoner of war and thus a survivor.

−18

RPG_are_my_initials t1_j1ie8rr wrote

I'd say your step dad was "fighting" in the Vietnam war, he just (presumably based on your post) didn't see active combat. But it depends what you define as "fighting." I think the average person in the US understands fighting in a war to mean being part of the military at the time of a war and supporting the war effort, but would have varying views on the extent to which that support must be directly or indirectly linked to live combat. In this case, I view your step dad as having been directly supporting the war effort and his proximity, even a hundred miles away, made him a potential candidate for live combat if needed. For example, the ship could fight in the war without those on board ever stepping foot on land. In some cases there could be value in measuring the level of fighting a person was engaged in, such as to predict potential needs to provide post war services like counseling for PTSD, but your step dad was fighting by provide whatever auxiliary services that ship was needed for and placing himself at risk for live comba

What do you mean nothing horrible happened before 1941? Jews were targeted and oppressed for the decade prior with their rights being limited and with instances of violence. That's not "the Holocaust" but you said nothing "horrible" happened then, and that was indeed horrible.

Second, why would a baby not count as a survivor in your example? Nazis didn't exempt killing Jewish babies during the Holocaust, so for example if a Jewish family during that time was in hiding and had a baby, then that baby is a survivor the same as the rest of the family. Had the family been discovered in that hypothetical, they'd all have been treated similarly, and in fact the baby would be more likely to be executed quickly since they can't be exploited for labor.

Finally, your last sentence appears to define a Holocaust survivor as someone "who was a prisoner of war," which doesn't make sense. I'm assuming you made a mistake. But to be clear, almost none of the Jews sent to be executed were there because they were a prisoner of war, and they weren't soldiers. A few did fight but most of the Jews were noncombative civilians.

I agree with the general point that not ever Jewish person who lived during world war II is per se a Holocaust survivor. I don't think anyone in this thread is arguing that though. But an individual may be a survivor without having gone to a concentration camp. Evading Nazi detection and the camps is also surviving.

13

Synec113 t1_j1i3hvc wrote

If you want perspective, you should ask one of the survivors what they think constitutes being a "survivor"?

Not on me if someone beats the shit out of you for it though.

7

brackfriday_bunduru t1_j1hkaqr wrote

A number of survivors were children. While they’re now elderly, there’s up to a few decades between them and those who were adults at the time. I’d imagine there would be a few in their early to mid 80’s

21

FreedomPaws t1_j1hi42u wrote

There was an old lady in Mariupol that Russia bombed to dust and she said how she survived the nazis and now the same was happening to her by the russians.

5

ImAPixiePrincess t1_j1il1vo wrote

That’s a very important point you made. It’s recent history. Child survivors of the Holocaust are still around.

5

letters2nora t1_j1hrmwf wrote

Thousands of meals, not necessarily* thousands of people

3

loneranger07 t1_j1ixp45 wrote

Yeah and millions of kids lived thru holocaust ... Stands to reason NYC, a mecca for European Jews for more than a century and a city of millions, would have more than its share. Just a thought. I believe it. There are probably more than 100 or 1000 even in Atlanta, GA where I live as its also a metro area of millions with a thriving Jewish community not to mention all kinds of diversity anyhow

3

amitym t1_j1j1tiu wrote

What do you think everyone dies when they turn 80?

3

westbee t1_j1j4ly9 wrote

What do you think 100% of Jewish people over 80 is are holocaust survivors?

−1

Itay1708 t1_j1jgpw7 wrote

Are people this ignorant? There are over 100,000 holocaust survivors in israel alone.

1

Goblue520610 t1_j1jlw51 wrote

Two of my family members just passed last year, both holocaust survivors. I had many in my family, this article brings tears to my eyes. I am so profoundly grateful for their compassion, kindness, and big hearts to do this service.

#neverforget

0

Kneecap71 t1_j1gy8db wrote

Exactly! This has always raised a red flag for me…. Someone please set the years/dates/2022 straight

−13

Evening_Condition_76 t1_j1gzhj0 wrote

Yes and in the articles picture everyone eating the said food is definitely too young to be a holocaust survivor

−20

cateybee t1_j1hna0i wrote

The picture in this post? They're the volunteers, it says so in the article. They're not eating in this picture.

19